Cisco Wireless Reviews

We use it for WiFi for Internet, Intranet access, and VOIP in a high density area campus environment.

Wireless Voice over IP (VOIP) on a diversity of VOIP phones along with Cisco Jabber, Cisco phones, and Ascom.

Device profiling allows us to have different policies applied by ISE to wireless clients.

Many wireless controllers' firmware have bugs in their new releases, which are not stable, especially in an environment with many wireless AP (WAP) types.

The easy way to integrate it with the existing network. Also, at the implementation, the simple management of the access points in a centrally console.

Before the implementation in 2006, we had 20 stand-alone access points where the administration tasks were complicated; any change has to be made in each AP.

Since August 2006.

Not really.

Until now they are very stable, but in some cases in which we had a problem there was a fix to solve the problem.

No issues encountered.

Good, 9 out of 10

Good, 9 out of 10

No, this product is the only one I have used.

As in the majority of new implementations there is a lack of knowledge of the products, but with some time and a lot readings at the end was easily.

It was a mixed schema; the case study and the initial implementation was made by a vendor, then, the tune up was made by us.

No, it was the only one because all the network infrastructure is Cisco: Total compatibility.

Have clear ideas about the requirements or goals for the company before implementation and have a good case study.

Our client is a manufacturer that uses Cisco Wireless to provide WiFi coverage for the entire factory. 

We implemented Cisco Wireless two years ago.

Cisco Wireless is stable.

Cisco Wireless is scalable.

Setting up Cisco Wireless isn't easy, but it's not that difficult, either.

The price of Cisco Wireless could be lower.

I rate Cisco Wireless eight out of 10. However, I wouldn't typically recommend Cisco Wireless. In this case, the clients had to implement Cisco to meet a corporate standard. If someone asked me to suggest a good WiFi solution, I would say Ruckus.

Cisco Wireless can be used for a wireless solution anywhere you require. 

Cisco wireless plus, Cisco routers, or Cisco switches,  when combining them together they work very well. Some of the controller features are available now in the Cisco switches and routers. Most companies have Cisco as their backbone infrastructure and if you have Cisco solutions already in place, you should continue with Cisco.

Overall good featured product.

I have been using Cisco Wireless for more than one year.

Cisco Wireless is highly stable.

The scalability of Cisco Wireless is good.

We have approximately 300 users using the solution.

The installation is very tiring and painful, the process could be easier.

We have completed the installation of eight access point routers in three days, and this was because of some issues with the infrastructure. We had a customer that had 10 access points and the controller was there. It was simple, it was only a one-day process to put it in, connect with the controller, and it is configured.

Other solutions, such as Oracle and Aruba, tend to be less complicated.

We have two people that are required at a minimum to do the implementation and maintenance of the solution.

There are annual subscriptions to use this solution. I have not been able to understand the licensing of Cisco. Some of the Cisco executives were not able to understand them either. When you first start out the price is zero but when it comes to a time of renewal you have to pay. 

I cannot say the solution should be cheaper because it has a good price point. It is not that they are very expensive, but compared to other solutions available in the market they are expensive. However, they are premium products that make the price suitable for what benefits you receive.

I have evaluated Oracle and Aruba solutions.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Cisco Wireless an eight out of ten.

We use it for all kinds of equipment including, laptops, mobile devices, and guest access. We are just using the basic features and just the wireless connection.

If I take it away, that would be a nightmare because we have a lot of devices working through wireless.

The capacity, security, downloading, and exporting data are all very good. It's user-friendly, but if I look at Meraki versus normal Cisco equipment, then I think that Meraki will be much more user-friendly.

The price could be better. The configuration is also complex. It would be better if there's an NEC solution. That's one of the things we really want to have. It should also be as fast as possible.

I have been using Cisco Wireless for a couple of years.

It's stable, but it's expensive.

We got in touch with technical support once, and that was good.

The initial setup is complex. We currently have a complex configuration.

It's expensive. The pricing is an obstacle.

I would advise new users not to underestimate the complexity of the configuration.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco Wireless an eight.

It's very useful in terms of mobility. Before this solution you would have to find a product to connect to and to have a security ICU. Now it's much easier with personal customization.

Ease of use is the most valuable feature. 

The configuration interface could be easier. They should make roaming easier and should fix it so that when you cross a building you can keep the signal.

It has very good scalability. 

I would rate their technical support a seven out of ten because the solution's support can always use improvement. 

We previously used Aruba. Their technique is the same but it's easier with Cisco.

You need to learn the technology but after that the setup is easy.

I would rate it a seven out of ten. It's good but it's not a ten because there are some specific technicalities they can improve on. I would recommend using this technology. 

Central controlling of all APs.

It has enabled the organization to become cable-free.

Training support for clients is needed.

3 years -

Cisco Wlan Controller 5508

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

Excellent.

Middle.

No other solution was used.

Pretty Straightforward.

A vendor(Xiamen WisDom Net), They have 3 CCIE engineers in routing and switches but not in Wi-Fi, They quickly improvee their Wi-Fi skills and even I improved a lot.

High.

We invited 6 vendors that offered Cisco, Juniper, Aerohive brand Wi-Fi solutions to evaluate and compare products.

See my website article:

http://aweisoft.net/Knowledge/Cisco/OptimizeWiFi/OptimizeWiFi.aspx

Cisco Wireless is for wireless networking. We use WLAN to connect endpoints wirelessly to mobile phones, tablets, and laptops that have WiFi protocol enabled. We have more than 50 employees using this solution.

Cisco Wireless is one of the more stable products so their products are scalable.

I've been using Cisco Wireless for about six years now.

It's stable.

It's scalable.

It's easy to set up if you have the technical knowledge. It's not a user-based deployment where you ask the user to go and deploy. You need to have some technical understanding of the solutions before you deploy them. On that level, it's easy to deploy.

Deployment requires network and hardware engineers but the number depends on the kind of deployment. It depends on the project server. Sometimes it's one or two. If it's a big project, I'll tend to use it more.  But broadly speaking, in terms of domain, you need network engineers, hardware engineers, and network architects.

Cisco is costlier relative to other solutions.

I would rate Cisco Wireless nine out of 10.